DNA Dynamism
| September 30, 2011 | Posted by PaV under Intelligent Design |
Just in at PhysOrg.com. Non-dividing brain cells quickly undergo epigenetic changes.
“It was mind-boggling to see that so many methylation sites — thousands of sites — had changed in status as a result of brain activity,” Song says. “We used to think that the brain’s epigenetic DNA methylation landscape was as stable as mountains and more recently realized that maybe it was a bit more subject to change, perhaps like trees occasionally bent in a storm. But now we show it is most of all like a river that reacts to storms of activity by moving and changing fast.”
So much for the view that the genome is rather static, and that the major dynamical changes to it involve random mutations. Instead, we have a view of a dynamical DNA that is entirely capable of change via interactions with its environment. Only integrated systems can function dynamically like this. And Darwinism trying to explain the rise of this level of dynamism is like trying to put a square peg into a round hole.
12 Responses to DNA Dynamism
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
DNA methylation represses gene expression. Off switch. Transcription is regulated, and very responsive to the environment (google transcription factors).
So it isn’t really a “dynamical” change to the genome, just the regulation of gene expression. Another of many mechanisms of dynamic gene regulation.
The surprise here is that DNA methylation is sometimes thought to be a stable mark (as was histone methylation, until demethylases were discovered).
DrREC:
There are two important points to be considered:
a) For transcription to be not only regulated (which is obvious), but also “very responsive to the environment”, there must be a very complex system of coded procedures for that, and we have no idea of where they are, how they are coded, and least of all how they originated (well, on that last point we in ID have some ideas). Please note that here we are not talking of simple feedback regulations from environment (a la lac operon), buth rather of transcription adaptation in the CNS, physical adaptations of neural cells at the genome level that very likely have a meaning connected to brain function. That is something.
b) DNA methilation is an epigenetic regulation. That means that it can be tranferred when it happens in gametes. Well, neural cells are not gametes, but we are just discovering a new scenario here, and in the general trend towards neo Lamarkism, who know what we are going to find?
PaV:
Thank for the very interesting post.
DNA is certainly much more dynamic that we think. And let’s remember that we still miss practicall all the important procedures that make life possible bot in a single cell and in a multicellular being. I have pointed out many times that how the same DNA generates millions (or probably more) of different, specific, functionally determined transcriptomes in single cells of a multicellular organism is still a complete, and fascinating, mystery.
We are debating darwinists mainly on protein genes information for the moment, because at least we know where and how it is coded, and it is easier to discuss. But when we discover where the procedures are, and how they are coded, and how complex they are… Well, I am happy I am not in the shoes of our interlocutors 🙂
Yes. THis is exactly correct. I read of a study one done on the brains of Monks from different regions around the world, who prayed all day and indeed their brains showed unusual patterns of activity even at rest. What we think about and do with our minds effects it physically. once again this shows that there are physical consequences for our spiritual decisions and actions. This can cut both ways as well of course. That is, if our minds are concerned with the wrong things it may do damage, but if our minds are focused on good things, or challanging things that build us up, over time that could pay off. Once again this gets into the REAL power of consciousness, and the power of prayer. Mind over matter.
Frost:
Once again this gets into the REAL power of consciousness, and the power of prayer. Mind over matter.
Absolutely! 🙂
of few notes:
The following video clearly shows just how extremely ‘plastic’ the brain can be to accommodate the ‘stable’ soul/mind of a person:
The ‘major dynamical changes’ in the brain pointed out in the OP, and as is obvious in preceding hemispherectomy study, as the result of ‘activity in the brain’, simply makes no sense from the atheistic/materialistic point of view, as if consciousness were merely ’emergent’ from the brain, but these studies make complete sense from the Theistic point of view of the mind having a primacy of existence over the brain. Moreover reality itself points to this primacy of mind over matter:
Here is the key experiment that led Wigner to his Nobel Prize winning work on quantum symmetries:
i.e. In the experiment the ‘world’ (i.e. the universe) does not have a ‘privileged center’. Yet strangely, the conscious observer does exhibit a ‘privileged center’. This is since the ‘matrix’, which determines which vector will be used to describe the particle in the experiment, is ‘observer-centric’ in its origination! Thus explaining Wigner’s dramatic statement, “It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”
further note, Jeffery Schwartz, from his observation of the brain’s ‘plasticity’, in response to treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder, has also come to the conclusion that ‘mind’ has primacy over the brain:
further notes on the ‘non-local’ quantum mind:
Particular quote of interest from preceding video;
corroborating evidence;
The preceding ‘quantum evidence’ provides a foundation for a plausible ‘transcendent mechanism’ for the following study:
As well, Stuart Hammeroff has done some interesting work, spanning 35 years, establishing the ‘non-local quantum connection’ for the mind to the brain:
etc.. etc.. etc..
of few notes:
The following video clearly shows just how extremely ‘plastic’ the brain can be to accommodate the ‘stable’ soul/mind of a person:
The ‘major dynamical changes’ in the brain pointed out in the OP, and as is obvious in preceding hemispherectomy study, as the result of ‘activity in the brain’, simply makes no sense from the atheistic/materialistic point of view, as if consciousness were merely ’emergent’ from the brain, but these studies make complete sense from the Theistic point of view of the mind having a primacy of existence over the brain. Moreover reality itself points to this primacy of mind over matter:
Here is the key experiment that led Wigner to his Nobel Prize winning work on quantum symmetries:
i.e. In the experiment the ‘world’ (i.e. the universe) does not have a ‘privileged center’. Yet strangely, the conscious observer does exhibit a ‘privileged center’. This is since the ‘matrix’, which determines which vector will be used to describe the particle in the experiment, is ‘observer-centric’ in its origination! Thus explaining Wigner’s dramatic statement, “It was not possible to formulate the laws (of quantum theory) in a fully consistent way without reference to consciousness.”
further note, Jeffery Schwartz, from his observation of the brain’s ‘plasticity’, in response to treatment for obsessive compulsive disorder, has also come to the conclusion that ‘mind’ has primacy over the brain:
further notes on the ‘non-local’ quantum mind:
Particular quote of interest from preceding video;
corroborating evidence;
The preceding ‘quantum evidence’ provides a foundation for a plausible ‘transcendent mechanism’ for the following study:
As well, Stuart Hammeroff has done some interesting work, spanning 35 years, establishing the ‘non-local quantum connection’ for the mind to the brain:
etc.. etc.. etc..
“well, on that last point we in ID have some ideas”
Do share.
Dr Rec, pardon the instrusion, I answered your questions from a day or two ago here:
http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-401213
I was wondering if your care to respond.
DrREC:
Regulation networks and adaptive procedures are very complex. In software, they represent a big part of the whole. Indeed, software is mainly about regulation and response to inputs.
The protein genes, in human genome, are only the final effectors of the complex mechanism of life. And yet, they ar by far funcionally complex enough that we can infer design for them.
But the regulation networks, especially the transcription regulation networks, which may include the methylation mechanism, are certainly much more complex.
Just think of how finely tuned the transcriptome regulation must be:
1)It must choose, among the about 20000 protein coding genes, those that must be transcribed in that specific cell
2)It must control how much each gene is transcribed
3) It must control when (in a temporal seqeunce) each gene is transcribed
4) It muist choose and control how each gene is transcribed, according to the current one gene – many proteins model
5) It must control all post transcriptional events
6) And finally, translation and post translational modifications must ne under strict check, too.
Moreover, the transcriptome, beyond being specific for the cell type, is dynamic, and constantly changing according to stimuli from within and without the cell (or even the body), including the state of cell division, checkpoints of DNA integrity, cytokines, hormones, neural control, and so on.
The procedures that efficiently manage the genome to comply with all that, although still not understood both in their nature and their implementation, must necessarily be so complex that design can be easily hypothesized for their origin, even more than for the origin of protein information.
cha-ching
OT: Body Code is a selection of biomedical animations that explore the human body at the microscopic and molecular scale. Body Code was designed for museum and art gallery exhibition, with the goal of reaching public audiences who do not usually seek out or are exposed to the details of scientific knowledge.
Body Code – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDZLiZB0iPY